This notion that “superteams” or “megateams” being some new phenomenon in the NBA is convenient, but wholly inaccurate. It sounds good, what with new conglomerations of stars popping up seemingly every season from Los Angeles to Brooklyn. But it’s actually a tried-and-true method to winning NBA championships and, like almost everything else from two decades ago, it is being rebranded for this new digital age.

In the NBA universe, anyone upset with the Miami Heat or Los Angeles Lakers for assembling elite talent on their rosters needs to stop hating the players and hate the game. Just because they were built through the free agent/trade lab and not grown organically — like revisionist historians will tell you those championship outfits of yesteryear were built — doesn’t diminish the end result in our eyes.

If the end game is winning championships by any means necessary, why wouldn’t you want a superteam playing in your backyard?

Who cares how they got there?

Fans in San Antonio have never complained about the serendipity that smothered the franchise when David Robinson got injured in 1996-97, just in time for the Spurs to luck into the No. 1 pick in 1997 and pick Tim Duncan.

There are any number of recipes for cooking up a superteam. We have no problem with a franchise stumbling into one (and to their credit, the Spurs had to build on that Duncan-Robinson foundation with shrewd moves and by nailing their draft picks consistently) or making the calculated steps necessary to create your own fortune.

Boston did it with the Kevin Garnett-Paul Pierce-Ray Allen Big 3. Miami did it with the LeBron James-Dwyane Wade-Chris Bosh Big 3. And the Lakers are attempting to do it with the Kobe Bryant-Steve Nash-Dwight Howard-Pau Gasol Big 4.

There’s no shame in that. No shame whatsoever.

Small-market fans who cry foul over this and claim that the superteam movement doesn’t allow them to compete with their big-market brethren must remember that this is equal parts rub-your-lucky-rabbit’s-foot luck and well-crafted planning by the franchise’s front-office brass.

Oklahoma City has a superteam of their own brewing in the lab at Thunder headquarters. They struck gold with Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden and Serge Ibaka in the Draft. Yet no one (outside of Seattle) ever accuses the Thunder of being evil for amassing such an explosive and versatile wealth of talent.

The Celtics, Lakers, Pistons, Bulls and Spurs — the franchises with the biggest piles of Larry O’Brien trophies over the past 42 years — won the majority of their titles with some form of a megateam (or whatever passed for such at the time).

The Celtics of the 1980s, with All-Stars Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Dennis Johnson as headliners, was a superteam. The Showtime Lakers of Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, James Worthy and others … superteam. Same goes for the Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars and the loaded Bad Boys Pistons. Go ahead and check the roster of that Sixers team that interrupted the party in 1983 … Dr. J, Moses Malone and All-Stars Maurice Cheeks and Andrew Toney = superteam. The list goes on and on.

The only teams of the modern era that might not qualify as superteams are the Hakeem Olajuwon-led Houston Rockets and the Dirk Nowitzki-led Dallas Mavericks. Pistons fans want to throw their 2004 team on this blue-collar list, but history will show that a group that included Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton, Ben Wallace at his zenith and Rasheed Wallace (all four made the All-Star team one year during their time together) was much closer to the megateam end of the spectrum than they were to the other side.

We’re not saying all of this to discourage the perceived “have-nots.” There are plenty of teams that haven’t been afraid to challenge the conventional wisdom that superstars, and superstars alone, win titles.

Just know that breaking into the mix without one of the league’s true superstars headlining a mini-gathering of All-Stars is going to be tough to do. And even when you do have that mix, it doesn’t guarantee anything (sorry, Knicks fans). You don’t always get what you pay for in this league.

So the next time you hear someone bellyaching about the game being taken over by superteams and how unfair it is, remind them that there have been only nine franchises that have won titles in the NBA since 1980. Almost every one was a superteam, or at least a megateam. It’s nothing new.

128 Comments

It’s pretty simple to me: Teams shouldn’t have more than 1 maybe 2 future hall of fame superstar players in their prime (unless we’re going to drastically reduce the number of teams in the league.)

That’s why I never had a problem with any of the teams mentioned. Even today’s Lakers are fine by me. All players over the hill with the exception of Howard. And they basically traded Bynum to get Howard.

The only team I find completely despicable is the current Heat team: prima donna players teaming up together in their prime, one of them even betraying his home town team that got him to the finals. And leaving money on the table to play together? Come on, these guys are smart enough to get their money through business and marketing in the long run.

And stop pushing the agenda that it is not okay to feel that way about the NBA, Sekou. I’m not a hater for wanting an as fair as possible balance in the league and superstars to lead teams instead of playing together. (And the 2004 Pistons had no single player on the level of LeBron and Wade, maybe not even at Bosh’s level.)

There are a bunch of arguments as to why superteams of the current vintage (e.g. Heat, Celtics w/ Ray Allen, but not the Thunder) are different from the Bulls of the 90s, Celtics and Lakers of late 80s/early 90s etc.

1. On current superteams, franchise-level players had already made their names (i.e. become known as franchise players) on the teams for which they had played before. For example, Lebron was MVP for the Cavaliers before joining the heat, Bosh was the Raptors’ franchise player (even Dwyane Wade factors into the argument, because he was a superstar before this iteration of the Heat team); for the Celtics, KG had had a hall of fame-type career at Minnesota, and Ray Allen was the centerpiece for the Supersonics.

2. (This applies only to the Heat, and in a way – because Carmelo forced his trade – the Knicks) Some of today’s superteams are player-engineered (players choosing where to go/whom to team up with through free agency), as opposed to via trades, or the Draft (the latter shouldn’t even be considered as a superteam construction tool because it’s the most organic way to improve the team). Robert Parish, for instance, didn’t end up on the Celtics because he decided Larry Bird was the teammate he needed to win a championship. Instead, it’s because Red Auerbach saw he would be the next piece of the puzzle. Whether a player-engineered superteam should be criticized more or less than a GM-engineered superteam is open to debate, but with the second option no player can be blamed for “taking the easy way out”.

Some potential superstars from the draft are just lucky they got drafted by “big market” teams. I can’t imagine if Magic or Jordon would have stayed with their current if Vancover or some other smaller teams had their number instead.

The Jazz will win it all because, and they beat the heat twice last year:) The Heat are over rated and got lucky, It won’t happen again until Lebron grows some Ice water in his veins. He’s still a choker when it counts. So they better be up a lot because if it’s close and he has the ball they will loose!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are hardly a super team. Bosh is soft, wade is broken and Lebron is scared:)

I don’t care what anyone says. There has NEVER been a NBA to have 3 free agent superstars and perennial all star game starters join together in their prime to get a championship. NEVER! You can’t compare any situation to the James, Wade, and Bosh transaction.

Boston teamed up late in their career…but they still had gas in them and they made the finals twice, winning once….that was as super team if you consider perk and rondo were the other 2 starters….

Miami has two superstars and an all star and they are all fairly young, with Wade the oldest at 30, which should still be at his peak…they are the only real SUPER TEAM in the league…

Maybe next up are the Clippers with Blake and CP3 and a bunch of really good role players

Lakers? BIG 4???? Common..big NAMES…sure…but Nash is old, Kobe is old, Gasol ain’t that young. Only Dwight is young and he is coming off back surgery….the names are big, but lets not forget about their age!!!! the wear and tear….

From history, odds are against teams with 1 or less franchise players to win championships. I see Spurs (without Robinson) & Mavs of 11 are the closest to 1 franchise player plus team D & O to win championships. 04 Pisons are the ultimate in showing team D & O without franchise players. Rest are dominated by franchise players multiples on 1 team.

If one is to say McHale, Parish, Johnson, Kareem (in 80’s waning years) are super stars but not franchise players, then Bird & Magic did an amazing job in transforming & bringing up their teams like no one else.

I will say this ONE MORE TIME. It’ starting to bother me that these writers cannot see truth. dont compare the lebron/wade/bosh union with that of thomas/dumars/johnson or magic/kareem/worthy or jordan/pippen/rodman or to nowdays duncan/ginobili/parker/ and garnett/pierce/allen. these guys got together in their primes and were considered 2 of the best 3 and 3 of the best 10. it would’ve been like magix, jordan, and ewing uniting in the 80’s. Do you need more that one good player to win it all? of course. do you need more that one allstar? sure. but taking less money to unite their talents as their CHOICE is different that by trades, or draft picks and even different that via free agency were the team acquires a player.

Super teams are new. The difference between teams now and teams back in the 80’s or 90’s is this:
3 and 4 players who were great that won championships became great on that team. Pippen wasn’t a superstar when he started with Chicago or even drafted. Dennis Rodman was a great player but you wouldn’t have picked Rodman over Barkley or Malone. Even Kobe wasn’t a star when he was drafted to Lakers, if so he wouldve stayed in Charlotte. Magic Johnson and James Worthy weren’t stars when they were drafted to the Lakers to join Kareem (Potential star in Magic). Now if in the 90’s, Michael, Barklely, and Hakeem (established franchise stars on their teams) said let’s get together so we can win, then that’s forming a superteam.

Today, Wade, Lebron, Kobe, Bosh, Nash, Howard, Gasol, Johnson, Deron Williams, and even Ron Artest (number 2 option in Houston behind Yao and number one option when he was hurt left to join Lakers.) were and are established franchise players who decided they wanted to have other star players or join other star players from other franchises.

That’s a big difference. Dennis Rodman, Pippen, Kobe and some of these other players would be with totally different teams if they were projected star players out of college.

I’m not mad at these players and teams who get these players but lets call it what it is. Michael, Magic, Bird, and all the rest were lucky that players turned into above average players that could compete with the rest.

They played basketball back in the day, players today are playing to beat the players from the past.

OMG Sekou this really is another horrible article. The comparisons are way off, they are not the same…. You should have included the star studded trailblazers (stoudemire, pip, sabonis, wallace, smith, etc.) or the payton, malone, kobe, shaq lakers. Teams that came together the same way (freen agency).

I think this year’s Lakers team will be quite similar to the Olajuwon-Barkley-Drexler-Pippen Rockets team, incredible on paper, but the chemistry just won’t be there.

You can hardly blame a team for buying their team, it happens in every sport, you should try watching Football, (or incorrectly, Soccer) that’s the only way you can actually win anything. It’s nice to see in the NBA there are safeguards against that.

That being said, I have far more respect for the Spurs, Rockets, Mavs, Pistons Championships than I ever will for Celtics, Lakers or Heat, because the teams were built in a much more organic and admirable way. Especially the Spurs. I hope the Thunder win a Championship soon (let’s be honest, they will) as this will be another example of how it is possible to build through the draft, although not in the same way the Spurs did.

The upcoming season will be very interesting, I think the Heat will be overconfident, and there are plenty of teams in the East capable of upsetting their party; Nets, Knicks, Pacers, Celtics, Hawks in particular. The West is obviously far more competitive, and I think the eventual winner will come from the West; Lakers, Spurs or Thunder. But there are sleeper teams here too; Grizzlies, Jazz, Clippers, Nuggets and at a stretch the Wolves.

On a final note, I think the most exciting team for the future has to be the newly gutted Rockets. So much talent in Lamb, Jones, White and D-Mo, added to Lin, Asik, Martin and Parsons, without a doubt are a team for the future.

Today, considering the fast life-style that everyone leads, credit cards have a huge demand in the
economy. Persons coming from every discipline are using the credit
card and people who are not using the credit cards have arranged to apply
for one in particular. Thanks for spreading your ideas on credit cards.

Of recent champs, I don’t consider mavs, spurs, 06 heat and pistons super teams. The term hasn’t even existed past the last few years. The spurs have been a team that plays good team ball with one superstar. Parker and ginobili r very good, but not super stars. The pistons had all stars only because they were winning. It’s common for championship teams to have at least a couple of guys on the all star team. It’s like a reward.eg Hamilton would not have been an all star if he wasnt on that team. 06 heat had wade and Shaq, but Shaq was slowing down a lot an that was really wades coming out party. From now on things will be different. The lakers team is just a joke. They have gone one up on everybody, and it’s just gona keep getting out of control.

I personally can’t call players who were “DRAFTED” by their respective team part of a super team. If you draft someone and they turn out great I call that good drafting. So yes the Lakers had Worthy, Magic, Scott but the only import on the showtime Lakers is Kareem. The year before Magic got there Lakers weren’t that great. As far as Pippen, Jordan, and Rodman being a Superteam that’s hard to say. Rodman is a guy who could pull 20 rebounds and guard the other teams best man but when he was with David Robinson nobody called the spurs a SUPERTEAM. Rodman had the type of game that would fit in good anywhere. Bottom line when it comes to the new school of NBA it started with the BOSTON big 3, and then the Lakers traded for PAU, 2 years later LEBRON goes to the HEAT. Now the Lakers trade for Superman. The Lakers just got beat badly twice it was time to join the club. Anybody who is hating on the Lakers superteam is just mad they made a much needed adjustment. Did you really think the Lakers the “YANKEES” of the NBA were gonna sit back and let teams stack on them and not try do something to? Apparently you’ve never heard of Jerry West or Mitch Kupchak

every team back in the day not only had multiple all-stars, but multiple hall of famers. Look it up. The only difference now is that the players have more control over where they go through whining, refusing to play, and acting like third graders who do not get as many cookies as other kids (read Dwight Howard). If Auerbach, Heinsohn, Daly, and other legit coaches/front office dudes were here today, they’d get rid of someone until they found a guy who wants to play on a basketball team.

But here we are, so everyone shut up and roll with it. It makes things more exciting anyway. I can’t think of anything worse than watching a Bobcats-Kings finals. The league should shrink, which makes everyone more competitive, and give a team back to Seattle.

Youngindy21
September 13, 2012 at 1:45 pm
The Indiana Pacers will soon destroy the notion that you need a Superteam to win an NBA championship.

But anyway just because the NBA has always had Superteams doesn’t mean it is the best way. We already know it is nothing NEW but doesn’t mean it is a good idea. More People might be more interested in the NBA if it weren’t dominated by a few select teams. I mean why should any small-market fan (besides OKC) even bother watching the NBA this season. I mean can small markets really compete when you have teams like the LA Lakers with 4 superstars and teams like Charlotte that have ZERO superstars? You can bring up OKC and San Antonio as much as you want but the fact of the matter is they drafted most of their talent. People DO care if the team was built organically because it is not really fair that some teams can buy all the Superstars and while some teams can’t. When teams aren’t on a level playing field to begin with it takes away from the NBA championship because people know that Big markets can get superstars whenever they want. And even the older teams that you mentioned DRAFTED a lot of their talent. Did LA draft Shaq or Pau Gasol, or Steve Nash, or Dwight Howard? NO. Did Miami draft Chris Bosh, Ray Allen, or Lebron James? NO. I am Okay with the superteams, IT IS the BOUGHT superteams that I have a problem with.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

I am a laker fan but I agree with young. I hate the team that buys superstars in their prime, to me that is unfair. Sure the Lakers got Nash but he is almost 40! Dwight and Bynum almost have no difference so to me that is fair. its like trading leBron for Durant.

ok first of all who cares about super teams i think its fun to watch..second its the players i am 28 and remember that there were not as many bums in the nba as there are now. almost every team was stacked back in the day…now we have too many players who are not good enough to be in the nba we have owners that waste picks on a kid who for the most part is playing college ball against guys who really dont plan on going to the nba or guys who will ride the pine in the nba….PUT IT LIKE THIS WOULD YOU WOULD HURRY HOME TO SEE THE PISTONS VS BULLS WOULD YOU DO THAT NOW?? DOUBT IT…….PACERS VS KNICKS WOULD YOU DO THAT NOW?? MAYBE YOU WOULD GET HOME BUT YOU WOULDNT HURRY…SO AGAIN TEAMS WERE BETTER IN THE GOLDEN ERA OF THE NBA BECAUSE THERE WERE NOT JUST STARS BUT THERE WERE A TON OF GREAT ROLE PLAYERS THAT PLAYED THE GAME AT A HIGH LEVEL AND PLAYED LIKE MEN PERIOD

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 3 PRETTY GOOD PLAYERS AND 3 TOP TEN PLAYERS. Wade and Lebron were considered 2 of the best 3 players and Bosh a top ten. the 80’S equivalent would have been MAGIC, JORDAN, EWING. 90’S: OLAJUWON, JORDAN, PAYTON. 2000’S: O’NEAL, KOBE, WEBBER. I hope you get what i’m trying to say here, every good team will have 3 excellent players: 2005: nash, stoudemire, marion; 2003: Webber, Stojakovic, Bibby, 93: Barkley, Johnson, Marjerle. am I the only who sees this????

Okay and last year Kobe was…well Kobe, Bynum was ranked 2nd best center, and Pau Gasol was a top ten PF still…

Taking jabs at Miami is just a haters past-time it seems like. People didn’t even give Bosh credit for being a good PF yet they’re upset with him on Miami. The Wade and James combo is probably one of the most deadly but nothing that we haven’t seen before like the article suggest.

No other “super”team in NBA history, other than the Miami Heat held a Press conference (or what ever they did may be called) and announced that they would win the next 7 NBA campionchips….. No, super teams are nothing new, but why do I like all the other teams like 96 bulls , 86 Celtics and the recent spurs dynsty so much better than the HEAT and the Lakers………Hmmm I wonder…….. I am a great fan of D, Wade though!

The Celtics traded for Garnett and Allen. The Spurs drafted Duncan. The Celtics drafted Bird and McHale, traded for Parish. The Lakers traded for Kareem, drafted Magic and Worthy. They also traded for Nash, Howard, and Gasol. OKC drafted Durant, Westbrook, Harden, and Ibaka.

BULLSKITS Ha Ha . The first Bulls 3-peat team was not a superteam. They had Jordan a young Pippen and the rest. I mean Jordan was a super team on his own. The second Bulls 3-peat team could be argued because they had that defensive and rebounding monster D. Rodman.

I don’t blame the teams or GM. Super teams will always be around. I have an issue with the players. True competitors wants to 2 things. Wins and competitions. Superstars should want to play against the best not with the best. Mentionned above… You would of never seen a team of MJ, Bird and Majic… A side from the dream team. They love competing against each other. Sure they had great supporting players on their team, but in the end. They had to step up and lead their team to get to the top or they would lose.

Side note, I never really considered Bosh a true superstar. Above average Fwd, but not a guy that could lead a team. This is coming from a Raptor fan.

I dont see all the fuss if you are unhappy at your job you leave if you’re under contract sometimes you simply buy it out, and then you go to a company that can offer you the best wages and/or best future. Same with these players, if i personally was a superstar player and got drafted to the magic or cavs i would obviously spend the first couple of years there see how it goes if as they did after 6,7 years if nothing is happening (in dwights case it starts going in the opposite direction) then i leave in the prime of my career and go somewhere that can give me the chance to challenge for a title. After all 5,6,7 years of trying to make it work alone ie LBJ an dwight must get very tiring and annoying.As for the article i agree it has always happened it simply hasnt always happened in this way but hard for me to say cause i was too young to remember the bad boy pistons or the very beginning of the bulls and mj and pippen.But ill tell you this whoever think the bulls werent a superteam is simply kidding themselves cause they were like the heat on steroids- MJ better than wade, Pippen not as good as LBJ fair enough but a franchise player non the less and a hall of famer and D rodman better than bosh hands down and a hall of famer. So come on no to mention they had WAYYY better role players than the heat-kerr,kukoc,grant even longley.

The thing was before it was the exception not the rule and now if you don’t have a stacked team you can forget competing. But as the saying goes don’t hate the player hate the game.

The difference is the superteams of the past weren’t built through planned free agency signings or trades. Most of them were built from the ground up. They had to learn how to work together.

That’s why no one is hating on the Thunder. Same for the Bulls of the 90s, the Lakers, Celtics and Pistons of the 80s and the Spurs of the 2000s. Probably only the 83 Sixers was built via a Moses Malone trade, but the rest of the team already had a core, Moses was simply the missing link. Same can be said for the Rodman signing to the Bulls. By your definition, Only the Celtics and Lakers of the 80s can be considered superteams in terms of talent, but besides Abdul-Jabbar, every one else was hasn’t been a leader of another team. It is clearly Bird for the Celtics and Jabbar then later Magic for the Lakers.

Superteams today generate hate because all those players were leaders and perennial all-stars prior to being part of a superteam. What’s even hateful is that they all seem planned by the players themselves, whether true or not, that’s how they look to be perceived.

great article, and alot of great comments …. This is something that most ACTUAL fans of the game have thought alot about … there will always be those bandwagon Heat and Lakers or whoever last hoisted a banner that don’t really know anything except that their new favorite team has a good shot this year. I was a lifelong hater of Stienbrenner’s Yankees, I grew up on the west coast, they were the evil wal-mart team….but then I married a girl from New York…I still hate the Yankees, but I see now that their best teams were a combination of player development, coaching, robbing the best talent from other teams, and bringing about a convergence of talent at the right time to grab a pennant….

I will always be pulling for the underdog in the fight … But this is what makes sports entertainment so entertaining, I wouldn’t have it any other way … nothing about the rat-race of the world is equal or fair, why should the NBA try to be? ….GO JAZZ!!

WHOEVERS THINK THE HEAT WILL JUST CRUISE THE EAST U BETTER CHECK YOURSELF B4 U WRECK URSELF SONN…BOSTON IS DEEP, SO IS THE PACERS, THE BULLS,AND AND DONT EVER FORGET THE DWILL AND JOE JOHNSON DUO IN THE BACKCOURT THEY CAN CAUSE PROBLEMS…TO WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS NOWADAYS U HAVE TO HAVE A SOLID ROTATION ON THE BENCH DONT MATTER IF U HAVE THE BIG 3, BIG 4, OR SUPER MEGA TEAMS…UR BENCH HAVE TO WIN GAMES FOR YOU ! AS FOR THAT NOTEIM A LAKER FAN MYSELF AND I AM HAPPY W OUR NEW ADDITIONS ON THE BENCH; ANTAWN JAMISON, JORDAN HILL,STEVE BLAKE, JODIE MEEKS. MUCH PROPS TO MITCH KUPCHACK, UR A GENIUS ! SO B4 U ARE AMPED UP ABOUT UR STARTING 5, PLS TAE A LOOK AT UR BENCH MOB AND SEE IF U THINK THEY GOT WHAT IT TAKES….

I think the bulls could win it without a superteam. Lakers are my favorite team, but what that team has is different. Once Rose is healthy, that team will be one of the best ever. I dont know how they do it, but for some reason they win big.

This article has been a long time a coming! Finally someone who realizes that LeBron and the heatles arent the only or first superteam. Maybe now less educated basketball fans can stop hating the heat and blaming them for joining forces. Look at LA they got a big 4! and nobody says anything! and when boston came together they had BIG 4, but when the heat come together oh my we need to hate them for no reason at all.

Kobe didnt go talk to Pau, Dwight & Nash and said ‘hey lets all sign the same contract so we are all FA’s at this season and if our teams aren’t winning we will all join 1 team’ I can also tell you Paul Peirce didnt do the same with KG & Ray Ray.

It was suss in the first place for these 3 stars (Lebron, Wade & Bosh) to sign the same/similar contract as each other. Then on top of everything, both Lebron & Bosh leave their teams with nothing and join Wade in Miami.

Can you see the difference in how these superteams were made? Most were made by trades/drafts with generally the other peice being picked up via FA. LA’s ‘superteam’ : trades, Boston’s ‘superteam’ : trades.

2004 Pistons – only Rasheed and Ben were all stars leading up to their championship. And Rasheed only arrived at the trade deadline. Chauncey and Rip became all stars thereafter so there is no way you can call that team a superteam at the time they won the championship. They wewre an individual team, not a team of indivuduals like the Lakers who they smoked in the finals.

Sekou was talking about the teams that won at least a championship. The Rocket’s era you were talking about were a lot formidable on paper because they also had Scottie Pippen, who briefly played there before his stint in Portland. That could have been a superteam had they won a championship together, but it only proved one thing: superteams are consisted of super-teammates, not a bunch of super-individuals.

Miami were a bunch of three super-individuals (if Bosh would count as one) who came together and played their first NBA Finals two seasons ago. 2004 Lakers were basically the same thing, as well as their ’69 counterparts. Last season Miami was a superteam who had the season MVP, Finals MVP, and Olympics MVP in LeBron, a 6-time All-Star and 2006 Finals MVP in Wade, and a 7-time All-Star in Bosh who made their best efforts to win the Finals altogether.

Spurs didn’t win titles with a super team. It’s the system and chemistry which made their players better. And Thunder isn’t a super team either, they just got lucky with their draft picks and developed their chemistry.

for starters i believe people need to stop and realize that almost every team in the nba(if they don’t already have an established superstar) has a player/players with superstar talent and potential,the problem lies with the organizations ability to do their job.the failing franchises will complain and deflect away from their ability to create a competitive team while those who know what they’re doing regardless of their “market” will prosper(i.e spurs,okc,indiana).secondly id love to understand why is ok for a franchise to cut or trade players at a moments notice but when a player is in a position of power and decides to explore his options why is it cast out to the public in a negative light

Dirk NOWITZKI stayed true to his team, but he also did a lot for it to become championship-suited. You cannot possibly measure anyone by Nowitzkis loyalty, for his connection to his team is be more personal and emotional than in most other cases. And the likelihood of him getting it done again is not really high, but then again, it wasn’t before the Mavs actually won it all in 2011. I still dream of Dirk getting another ring, and his humbleness and loyalty makes it all seem even greater.
The only other player on that level who showed a similar amount of tremendous loyalty to his team was Michael Jordan, I guess, but he also had to have a lot of things modified in his team. So:if your franchise does NOT or CAN not do as much for you as Dallas and Chicago did for their focal points, leaving town is a very reasonable option – I mean, I wasn’t a LeBron fan until maybe this year, but the determination he showed in the last Finals was second to none, and come to think of it: who wants to see a superhuman player like LeBron ending his last game without a ring?
Even for haters a villain is much nicer to hate if he has a ring, and that jewelry suits every player of an LBJ, Dirk or MJ caliber fine…

dirk’s championship should go down in history as one of the greatest ever won by a superstar. no one did it with less talent around him and hardly anyone willed his team to the champinship ring like dirk did!

Agreed, Dirk’s performance in the Playoffs was legendary. Aside from being ripped apart by Brandon Roy in the comeback by the Blazers, the Mavs played great. I will give credit to Terry as well, and Chandler’s defense, but I have to say Dirk had a Jordan-esque moment in the Playoffs.

Dirk Played great in the last 8 minutes of every game. Honestly he stunk up the joint every game of the series until the 8 mintue mark, BUT that’s when it counted and his team needed him. Although in my opinion the real MVP of that series was Jason Terry he kept them in every single game and he was asked to guard Lebron James and he actually did it because Lebron James was the reason the Mavs really won the series. His poor play caused the Heat and their crazy fans a championship.

Dirk is one of the reason why they win the champion that year, however he is not the only one. if u asking me i’ll give dirk 30% of the credit, terry 25%, chandler and the rest of the team 30% and coaching staff 15%. Dirk might be the onlyone superstar on that team, but u cant disregard terry with his clutch/ offense or Chandler with his defense.

yeah, because jason kidd didn’t set up any plays or drop threes, and chandler didnt guard the paint preventing miami from drving/cutting to the hoop, and barea wasn’t an annoying pg that basically played with chalmers/eddie house the whle time, stevenson (even though i hate the guy) played well defensivey and dropped three’s too.

Cmon Chris if you were a LA fan you would be excited too with Nash, Bryant, Peace Out, Gasoft, and Howard. I wish the Sixers had this team I’ll you that. I would be going crazy too, but without the predictions since howard is gonna be out for a while.

i cant take you seriously when you think Ron Artest is a ”super player”. and if im completely honest, the lakers bench is nothing to be afraid of. maybe if they play kobe with the bench guys more than nash and howard, but overall they don’t seem to have players that can step up, a la mike miller, norris cole, james harden, nick young (not consistent, but he showed flashes in the grizzlies series).

I could say the same thing about Mia bench. They are not that great.
Whoever expected Mike Miller to come out and hit 9 from 11 3pts (or wateva he shot) in the finals are lying to themselves. Even Heat fans were like wat the hell. As far as i knew, Mike’s back was broken and he wasnt capable to play again. Mia, bench was not that great until the finals. Lucky for the heat atleast one bench player everygame stepped up and produced (Norris Cole, Mario Chalmers and also Mike Miller). Who expected battier to avg 16pts per game in the finals series.

If ur part of the rotation in the NBA, it means u have potential to be a difference maker (either on O or D). Unless ur specifically placed on the bench to keep the fire power up when starters rest, thats why u have a 6th man (i.e. Jason Terry, Lamar Odom with Lakers & Jamal Crawford).

You are right about one thing about the Miami bench. However, I see it the other way around. Look, Miami’s bench is not great, but it gets the job done. Mike Miller is not expected to play big time like LBJ or Wade, but when Miami needs scoring aside from their superstars, he steps up to the plate. Miller might seem to be in bad shape, but LeBron and Wade knew his capabilities, and they themselves lobbied Miller to Pat Riley. And as for Battier, the Heat organization was looking for a player who plays 100% of the time without complaints on a consistent basis. He was an important player in Houston when they pushed L.A. in 7 games the last time they made the playoffs. Battier was the man, and look what his brand of game made the Heat last season. Notice that even when Bosh came back from his injury, Battier’s minutes are still up because of his contributions (tangible or intangible) on the floor. Get the facts straight up, dude.

SEOKU IS NOW TELLING THAT IT ‘S NOTHING BAD TO HAVE ALMOUST ALL FIVE SUPERSTARS IN THE TEAM AND HE SAYS THAT WHEN LAKERS HAVE FIRST UNIT WITH ALL STARS: NASH, BRAYANT, ARTEST, GASOL, HOWARD
BUT WHEN MIMI HAD THERE FIRST YEAR BIG 3 HE WASN’T THAT HAPPY ABOUT SUPERTEAMS IN NBA

I love the nba and watch it as much as I can in little old New Zealand.

The post Carmelo nuggets are one of my favorite teams due to their awesome speed, athleticism and ball movement. With the addition of Iguodala I am truely hopeful they will get over the hump and compete in the west. I would put them ahead of Memphis and Indiana with Ty Lawson improving every season and the emergence of Kenneth Faried and George Karl’s influence on Mc Gee.

Unfortunately the west is very deep with superstar heavy teams and my wishes may be simply that. Still feel that soon ( next 2 seasons or so) the Nuggets could be put on the same level as the ’04 Pistons.

At the end of the day superstar teams are part of the NBA. Always have been, always will. Extra credit goes to those teams who play unselfish basketball and can win whilst doing so.

Because they don’t have a super team, their only star is Bargnani, and possibly Lowry depending how he plays this season, I will count Valanciunas, but not now, give him a few years and I think he can be the 3rd best C behind Bynum and Howard. Raptors are no where near close to being in this conversation, and I’m from Toronto and a Raptors fan, plus they haven’t proved to be a contender yet. OKC, Miami, LA are all contenders. I would count the Knicks in this conversation though, they haven’t proved to be a contender yet, but they have an amazingly good all around team, Melo, Stoudemire, Chandler, Kidd, Felton, Novak, Smith, Brewer, Camby. I think the Knicks as of now are the only team in the East that has the potential to knock off the Heat in the Playoffs, they just need to form the chemistry and make Melo and Stoudemire play well with each other.

I know a lot of people say they dislike Miami because of the pre-celebration and not simply because they formed with three stars. I can see how that rubs people the wrong way, but at the same time people are hypocrites because they run around saying what their team will or will not do like they are actually on it.

There was the pre-celebration, but there’s also the fact that Bosh and Lebron joined through free agency, whereas the Celtic’s Big 3 was made from trades, where at least the other teams got something in return. Bosh and Lebron left the Raptors and the Cavs with virtually nothing.

The only reason Lebron left the Cavs with nothing is because that’s exactly the type of help he got during his years there…nothing. As for Bosh, it wasn’t like the Raptors were going to be winning any championships anytime soon even if he stayed.

TLDR; The NBA continues to increase in depth, and progress towards parity. However some fans are upset at a couple recent championship players who made an outstanding impact for their team, and want to discredit them. There are alot of good players in the nba, but alot are mostly ignored unless they are on a solid team.

It is certainly true that the players percieved to be the biggest stars in the league all currently reside on a couple teams. The problem is not however, that all the best players are on these couple teams, but that fans only percieve players on great, championship contending teams to be a superstar. Alot of this comes down to championshipitis, where the perception of a player’s basketball capabilities skyrockets once they have won a championship. My point is that, there are alot of these great players in the very deep modern nba, but the fans tend to ignore players until they contend for a championship. People conflate basketball ability with fame. There’s always a player on a team that is going to be marketed or portrayed as the franchise centerpiece, regardless of how good they are.

There are alot of players around the nba that are as good or better than most of these players considered to be these “big threes” and what not. If the grand scheme of things the league is becoming much more level than it was. If you don’t believe me look at how many championships the Lakers and the Celtics have won. Also I’m not sure how free agency formed teams are less “organic” than draft formed teams. Teams formed by free agency are because the players decided to play for that team, and the team wanted them to. The Draft is, while necessary, completely arcane, and is best utilized by playing poorely and losing.

Now lets consider the real reason the majority of those that complain about the current “superteam phenomenon” are doing so. THey want to discredit the player or players that recently won a championship. All the teams that have won championships recently have had a number of very good players. Quite a few of these championships have been the result of very outstanding play by 1 particular player, which is what these resentful fans want to ignore. You can say they had help, but really the last player to really carry a mediocre team to a championship was Kareem with the Bucks. The league is much more talented now, and I’m not sure a similar feat is repeatable.

I’ve been following the league since the seventies and it has changed but everything is still the same, its about the green, only now the children have the run of the house. When children are in charge, its all about the style and no substance. So this only gets you hollow championships.

Couldn’t agree with John more. There have only been 3 Superteams in recent history and all to a certain extent have cheapened the sport.

The great thing about the NBA is that with the right draft choices and shrewd acquistions, anyone’s got a chance of competing for the Championship. By making Superteams via Free Agency the norm, you’re essentially saying that the Championship contenders should be limited to teams from Florida, California or New York, where the marketing potential for players far outstrips the remaining teams.

Ok, so San Antonia lucked out with Duncan, but everyone admires them for the way they scouted Parker and Ginobli and made shrewd signings such as Bowen to complement them. Similarly, Oklahoma blew up an ageing team for draft acquisitions and young players and have been arguably the most successful teams in using their high draft picks wisely.

Even though Boston arguably created the recent Superteam phenomenom, the players they signed were veterans and it was clear that their championship window was small. You also have to consider that in signing Garnett and Allen they gave up Al Jefferson, Jeff Green (who was considered at the time to be the 2nd coming of Pippen) and the 6th pick (which was Jonny Flynn, but could easily have been Seth Curry). It doesn’t make it right, but there’s a reason that there wasn’t the outrage there is with Miami and LA.

What Miami have done requires no player development, no scouting, no shrewd investment, simply 1 superstar with a strong contact list. It cheapens the sport and I hope that ego’s implode the team down the line. Here’s also hoping that the ’12 Lakers go the way of the ’04 Malone / Payton Lakers.

So you laud san antonio and okc for their “shrewd signings and draft picks” but you criticize the Lakers FO for making some nice, schrewd as some may say, signings and trades. Whose fault is it that PHX, ORL made bad deals? they agreed to trade and play into Lakers “schrewd” trade/plans.

What is schrewd about signing players by having the resources to offer them more money and more perks? Schrewd would be the ability to sign those players without those things.

I might agree with your sentiment if every team had an equal opportunity of signing free agents, but that isn’t the case. The problem is the league has given the players too much power to the point they are deciding where they play. Check out most other sports, it’s teams who decide where players play.

I don’t think it should be the team that chooses where the players play, nor do I think the players should hold the team hostage by forcing a trade. I think the whole notion of the draft is insane, you are forcing players to play somewhere terrible, many of them rot away in that horrible misery and don’t get to develop as a player. People fear that the best prospects will always go to the best teams but why are we putting kids (18-22 year olds are kids) under so much pressure to try to turn a franchise around? Some of these greatly talented players aren’t mature yet, or they just aren’t good with the pressure because they are kids and many would benefit by learning from great players as opposed to trying to immediately take a team of terrible veterans to the playoffs. I understand that the draft is in place to keep parity in the league, but the terrible teams also don’t need to do any scouting as the whole country is already raving about the best college players all year round. College sports being on the ridiculous level that it is at in terms of television ratings and all that make scouting useless, it also handcuffs the terrible teams that sign these “great players” as the 1st overall pick usually gets an insane contract even though they have NO pro experience. I don’t like baseball, but i love that there is true player development and scouting required, yes there is a draft which i don’t like, but you rarely see rookies in baseball getting thrown right into the game and being crowned as the face of the franchise, same goes for the NHL. There are college players (and players who don’t even play college ball) who are better than the ones at the big name schools who make it to the Final four and all that, but they never get a chance because nobody truly scouts. That’s also why I love seeing teams get european players, shows that they aren’t locked in the madness that is the NCAA and they know that there are better alternatives at times.

you can hate all you want but it wont make any different. NBA always been this way if you cant build your team through the draft, than you build your team through free agent or trade. you cant blame the Laker or Miami for any of this. If you want to blame then blame the owner or the GM who cant match or do w/e it take to get superstar. at the end of the day it all on luck.
did some of the trade r unbalance? yea anyone fault cuz it up to the GM to confirm and make the deal. if ur gm like Cupchak who make a great trade for both Gasol(not really a steal since the trade include his bro Mark Gasol) and Howard you cant blame him for that.

of course players will choose where they want to play, they are not slaves just because you pick them through the draft. If they want to leave you can’t be angry at them. Both cavs and magic did a horrible job as creating a roster around their superstars, so they took action. How would you feel if you were dwight and the next best player you are playing with is jameer nelson? or if you were lebron and your best teammate is drew gooden? I get that hollywood is more attractive than the most cities but if you can’t get good a player to play with lebron or dwight you can’t explain it with just the difference of the city or the money. you can’t blame a good gm because he is making good deals and you can’t expect nba to bail out the worst gms of the history because they have less money and not so entertaining city.

all championship teams are SUPER TEAMS. obviously, they won everything(championships) that’s why you considered them as SUPERTEAMS.. but the main reason these previous teams you mentioned like the celtics, lakers, pistons, rockets.. these players where not the main guys on their previous teams before and some of them are came from the draft compared to these players that came to lakers this year, miami and celtics. my question to you are.

did Dennis Johnson the main guy on his previous team? the same impact dwight howard, steve nash, lebron james did on their previous teams before joining their current teams? the reason that these teams from the 80’s and 90’s are so great is because, they are winning. period… have you seen, magic johnson joining the larry bird? or charles barkley joining the bulls, patrick ewing and reggie miller joining stockton and malone? that my friend is a superteam.. which the CURRENT SUPERTEAMS are doing right now.

I saw Clyde Drexler joining Hakeem, and I saw Kareem demand to be traded. One of the franchises he wanted to go was the Lakers (who already had a winning history). The fact is that players have been doing this kind of stuff for years but it’s much more public now and once the media gets a hold of it then you can expect the circus to start.

ahh i remember when kobe was on a losing team with the lakers after shaq left… what did he do again? oh yea he publicly demanded a trade! why did he do this? i’d say to provoke the Lakers GM into giving kobe exactly what he wants from now on

MCADOO was a beast before joining the Lakers of the 80’s. Not to mention the draft process was different. Magic one of the top if not the top pick and he went to the Lakers one of the best teams in the league at the time. They had 4 all stars on the team allof which were in the all star game at the same time later in the 80’s.

Personally, I think this is just an attempt to convince the fans that the inmates are not running the asylum. Because the league has let this craziness get out of control and every player thinks its ok to hold their team and the organization hostage, while the media makes a sideshow out of it, they want to spin it so that “this has always gone on”. As much as I love the game of basketball, I am really disgusted at the whining, spoiled players and the gutless owners who spoil them more because they want keep them, and the league that is so money hungry, they go along with all the nonsense.

if you’re referring to dwight howard or lebron james then you gotta understand that it is human nature for GMs to be desperate to keep any franchise player that is 1) only real superstar on your team and 2) being one of the top 5 players in the league and 3) constantly losing in the playoffs. the only thing a GM can do is tailor to all their needs…. or POOF! theyre gone!

truth is u do have a point BUT if you are a top 5 player the franchise owe you constant upgrades[if you are making the team better that is] i dont agree with superstars holding teams hostage but i also dont agree with Gms slacking off while i waste my primes either “teams owe star players that much” for well…being a STAR and filling the seats in ARENAS

The Indiana Pacers will soon destroy the notion that you need a Superteam to win an NBA championship.

But anyway just because the NBA has always had Superteams doesn’t mean it is the best way. We already know it is nothing NEW but doesn’t mean it is a good idea. More People might be more interested in the NBA if it weren’t dominated by a few select teams. I mean why should any small-market fan (besides OKC) even bother watching the NBA this season. I mean can small markets really compete when you have teams like the LA Lakers with 4 superstars and teams like Charlotte that have ZERO superstars? You can bring up OKC and San Antonio as much as you want but the fact of the matter is they drafted most of their talent. People DO care if the team was built organically because it is not really fair that some teams can buy all the Superstars and while some teams can’t. When teams aren’t on a level playing field to begin with it takes away from the NBA championship because people know that Big markets can get superstars whenever they want. And even the older teams that you mentioned DRAFTED a lot of their talent. Did LA draft Shaq or Pau Gasol, or Steve Nash, or Dwight Howard? NO. Did Miami draft Chris Bosh, Ray Allen, or Lebron James? NO. I am Okay with the superteams, IT IS the BOUGHT superteams that I have a problem with.

Miami has there big 3 because the drafted wade and gave pat riley a precent of the heat to be the gm/coach in 95….miami is a small market with good weather and an amazing front office…and if you think the pacers gona win the chip when you dont understand basketball, dont be mad that heat are good be mad that owners dont want to spend money nd bring a gm nd president that know what they are doing

I watched nba for san antonio last season, thunder got lucky otherwise we might be talking about how did they win a championship. sixers, nuggets, clippers, nets, grizzlers are all teams to watch. with the addition of the top pick, I would also watch hornets. there are more better teams around then any season that I can remember. 3 of them are particularly good and most probably will win the championship but I would also watch the games of the other teams as well. The only teams, I wouldn’t watch are; kings(they may have a good season), wizards(lost cause), bobcats, magic, pistons, raptors, bucks and trailblazers(I might watch them if lillard explodes like he did in vegas). that is, I think a short list. And yes, I would watch suns, because I wonder how will they do with that much offensive power, I would watch, hawks eventhough they lost johnson, I would definitaly watch timberwolves.. you get what I am saying, they don’t need to be contenders, they just have to play good basketball and I think that is enough.

YES… finally someone who can enjoy the actual sport. alot of fans these days only want champions for the sole purpose of reinforcing how good they think their favorite player is. i still think if lebron ended his career with 0 rings, he is top 10 of all time. if he gets multiple rings, he will be top 3

Im a CAVS fan…im only 26 but have been watching them since the early 90’s. I am from OHIO. I love my teams. Indians, Browns, Cavs. I love that my team competes and wants to win and as long as they are competitive and try to put the best team together that they can i cant complain. I love sports. i love watching my team. im going to the first ever preseason game in Canton Ohio on the 9th to support my team regardless if they are winning or not. We arent a super team. We arent even a good team but as a basketball fan i will watch them along with any other basketball game on tv. Lebron left but he is the best player i have seen since jordan. (sorry kobe)

The problem with the NBA is not the game or players. Its the cry-baby so called fans.
BE A FAN AND SUPPORT YOUR TEAM AND STOP CRYING BECAUSE ANOTHER TEAM IS BETTER.
NEWS FLASH!!! LIFE IS NOT FAIR. GET OVER IT!!

Couldn’t agree more. Can you imagine a team whose star player is Ginobili or Ben Wallace? Detroit and San Antonio were two Euro-styled teams, yes they had some players, but the essence whas the team spirit. That can’t be said of 2012 Heat, or 2004 Lakers.

“the rest of the 9 players on the Superteam are irrelevant for the definition”: not really, those superteams need those irrelevant players to win, last example is Mario Chalmers who all of a sudden began making baskets… I’m sorry, but the Heat wouldn’t have won without him.

am a heat fans, l cant wait, without the pression this year they going to kill, easely they can brake the record or the bulls, am thinkinng aroun 74-8 record without injuries. With Dwigth to the west its a straight route to the final, nobody in the east can challenge. Let me seat in the coach, get my popcorns with coca cola ready and enjoy the ride. GO HEATS

if celtics, thunder and lakers won’t play against heat maybe, plus I think, nuggets and sixers also have a shot at winning against heat, pacers also give them a rough time at the play offs. I give them 66 wins at most. I will write your name somewhere and we will talk about this again when the season is over.

ok…in english please…the heat are good but 74-8? noooo….wont happen. maybe they will reach 70 wins if they are lucky.

There are too many teams that are going to get up to play the heat. Teams that have serious talent such as: Celtics, Brooklyn, New York, Indiana, maybe chicago, philly + the western conference teams they will face such as: Lakers, OKC, san antonio, Denver, Clippers, even the T-Wolves.

These are all strong teams and you can even sprinkle in the little teams that may get up enough to compete and try to prove something such as cleveland, who have beaten the heat at home before.

Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant are both All Star caliber players. Multiple All star caliber players on a team make these so called superteams but in truth no one has one a championship without multiple all stars on the team in the last 25 years.

1) People care about whether a team was “organic” or due to “bought.” Sports is entertainment, and it’s less exciting to know that a team can just buy a bunch of really good players.

2) Superteam should not be defined as “two really good players” or “three really good players”, but as it was with the Celtics in 2008, the Heat in 2010, and the Lakers in 2012: “three franchise level players”. As in, every member of the “big three/four” was in just the previous year the focal point of a franchise. The three previously mentioned teams qualify. Also, the rest of the 9 players on the Superteam are irrelevant for the definition: just because the team has great players 1-12, doesn’t make it a Superteam in the currently used sense.

Yeah But they each became franchise players on 1 frachise, the other players went from the number 1 player of a team to transfering to a team with another number 1 player, the big 3 of the spurs just exchanged places as to who becomes the franchise player, on their first year together it was duncan, on their latest championship it was parker, and recently it was ginobili carrying the load

i love how everybody makes excuses to hate teams. stop, its pathetic. This article hits it on the nose. There have been super teams in the past that we remember as great teams but fail to acknowledge how they got there.

Sooooo many of the old great teams were formed through trade. jordan and pippen were there but they had to sign free agents and make trades to complete the roster including rodman.

The Lakers. they made a trade for kareem.

The pistons of the 2000’s couldnt win until rasheed

Look back at the teams that have won the championship since the 80’s….lengendary players
lakers: magic, kareem, worthy..shaq, kobe..celtics: bird, mchale, johsnon, walton..bulls: jordan, pippen, rodman…all in the 90’s early 2000’s…teams that people respected and some of those players were aqcuired through free agency or trades. each team.

That’s why I still love the 2004 Detroit Pistons who has no real superstar but beat the so called Superteam of the LA Lakers. Just beautiful team work and their offence just comes along with their great defence.

I mostly agree with you. However, your definition of “superteam” seems a bit rigid. According to you, were the Bulls from ’90 to ’98 a super team? I think it’s fairly clear that the Bulls ’90-’93 and ’95-’98 are NOT a superteam by your current definition, as the only franchise level players on those teams were Jordan and Pippen – although they were good, I think it silly to brand Kukoc, Rodman, or Horace Grant as franchise players. However, I think the Bulls in those periods were undeniably a superteam. Nonetheless, I think your general points stand.

I think Kerr and Grant, are good examples of great players making others better.
Substract them from the 92/93 Bulls, would the Bulls have won that championship, I think so. Substract Jordan/Pippen, would they’ve won the trophy – probably not. That’s defining a franchise player in my eyes. The one (or 2 or 3) that make the difference.
Definitively, both Kerr+Grant are good players on their own, they contributed to Spurs and Magic later as well. But I feel myself like a “Kerr-type” of player and with specific good players on your own team, it just works better as on a bad team or with players who can’t involve others that well.

Artifex you’re crazy if you think the Bulls would have won without Grant. he was their third leading scorer. Kerr I can say maybe because he hit some big shots but shots that could have also gone to Jordan or Pippen.

Pippen is my all time fav player in NBA history, BUT to claim that he is reffering to what this article is stateing, i tend not to believe, if it is true, no one has pointed a finger to The Thunder, Spurs and Boston (hate them lol) as they built thru the draft and brought in free agents by trading for there future pick and prospects. teams like indiana, orlando, raptors, etc will always get the short end. And of course the league will favor the “Super”team vs other teams.

I agree, there is clearly a difference between having good players vs franchise players. LA (as an example) bought 4 franchise level players (Kobe from LA, Gasol from MEM, Dwight from ORL and Nash from…well he’s been awesome everywhre) while OKC drafted 2 franchise level (Durant and I guess Russel) playsers and lucked out with getting 2 other good (Ibaka and Harden are great but you’d never build an entire franchise around them) but not outstanding players. The old Bulls had Jordan (obviously a franchise player) Pippen (Could’ve been one, we’ll never know) and a bunch of good players…but again, NONE that were at franchise player level. Sekou’s article concludes that any good player (pretty much any starter) who plays on a winning team is suddenly a mega player who ranks along the caliber of LA’s bought 4. Sekou got this one wrong I think.

Kobe was also drafted and Gasol was from the Lakers trading away Mac Gasol for him so they both can’t be considered “bought”. Also Nash is at the end of his career so he joined the lakers just because Lakers needed a PG and he seems the be the best one that is available. Nash also joined lkaers because he want ot not because they paid him more than any other team so i wouldn’t consider him as being bought by the Lakers either.